Posted on Jul 23, 2015
Reserve duty requirement for AC General Officer promotion?
17.3K
44
19
2
2
0
A comment that I have heard reflects the idea of a Total Army, in which Active Component Officers should have served sometime in the reserve community before they are considered for general officer. The thought is since all three COMPOs are working more closely, AC GOs will need to intimately understand how the RC works and what it brings to the table to better incorporate them into the mission. Yes, they do get (limited) education in their professional military education, but we are talking about a significant time period embedded in an RC unit. Tours such as an AC/RC position, working in First Army, assignment to one of the USAR Training Commands, etc.
Posted in these groups: 
Promotions
BG
Promotions BG
Posted >1 y ago
Responses: 8
5
5
0
not necessarily a bad idea, but not a great one due to flawed logic - you can read and listen, but until you have lived it, you will never know...
I thought it was, every reservist needed to do some time on active duty to know what "the real army was like." And, then, someone decided officers needed to served enlisted first, to better understand the plight of the soldier and barracks life. Of course, every President should have done some time in uniform (would a 4 year NG enlistment really be enough), of course, if you have been to prison, you probably better understand the shortcomings of the judicial system....
experience helps, but then you have those who try to tell you what you are and are not, based on those experiences.
I thought it was, every reservist needed to do some time on active duty to know what "the real army was like." And, then, someone decided officers needed to served enlisted first, to better understand the plight of the soldier and barracks life. Of course, every President should have done some time in uniform (would a 4 year NG enlistment really be enough), of course, if you have been to prison, you probably better understand the shortcomings of the judicial system....
experience helps, but then you have those who try to tell you what you are and are not, based on those experiences.
(5)
(0)
COL Thomas Ficarra
touche. I like the examples. I too was a victim of the serve enlisted before commissioning but I found it beneficial in the long run. I figure over 20 years in a career, a few can be spent with the RC somewhere... again, not my idea, just one I heard.
(0)
(0)
3
3
0
It has a historic precedence. McArthur banished Geo. Marshall to the Illinois Guard as an 0-6, and Marshall did credit that time as essential in the conceptual design of the Victory plan. It is alleged that McArthur did it to kill Marshall's career, though.
That said, it is excellent in theory, problematic in practice. We have known professional officers that were 'box checkers"- in that they studied and tried to land on the dime of that certain amount of time to be branch qualified, in their functional area, joint assignments, whatever. I'd say such a policy would encourage that sort of behavior.
I actually also think that the RC side would be the entity that killed such an initiative. We have our own schedules and some of the same habits in "checking blocks", and an AC program of this sort would not be helpful in the timely checking of blocks.
So, I'd have to say no- it's the officer's own responsibility to be functional in all aspects of jointness.
One man's opinion.
That said, it is excellent in theory, problematic in practice. We have known professional officers that were 'box checkers"- in that they studied and tried to land on the dime of that certain amount of time to be branch qualified, in their functional area, joint assignments, whatever. I'd say such a policy would encourage that sort of behavior.
I actually also think that the RC side would be the entity that killed such an initiative. We have our own schedules and some of the same habits in "checking blocks", and an AC program of this sort would not be helpful in the timely checking of blocks.
So, I'd have to say no- it's the officer's own responsibility to be functional in all aspects of jointness.
One man's opinion.
(3)
(0)
COL Thomas Ficarra
Appreciate your comments sir. Did not know that GEN Marshall served in the ILARNG, and doing some digging realized he served as the Senior Instructor from 1933-1936. MacArthur served with the 42nd ID during WWI to get combat experience and his first star, but that didn't seem to influence him much during the Bonus Army incident in 1932. Guess everyone takes away something different from their experience.
(0)
(0)
MAJ (Join to see)
This was done well into the early 2000's, it's failure is the reason the AGR program was stood up. All the AD XO's I worked for were terrible, the simple fact that the Army comes second in your life (behind your civilian career) is incomprehensible to many AD officer's which resulted in some very, very poor decisions. Then it also removes many of the responsibilities and opportunities for development from RC officers.
(0)
(0)
2
2
0
I don't think this is realistic. The problem is for an active component officer to serve in the reserve component, they need to take a "slot" in the reserve component, and thus someone else's potential job opportunity.
(2)
(0)
COL Thomas Ficarra
The system is set up that AC officers can work in RC units in AC specific slots. They do not go against current positions as they specifically titled as AC only (I won't go into dual hat status). A good example is First Army which is a multi-compo unit. It has positions specified for AC, USAR and ARNG soldiers and only those personnel can be slotted there. There is ample opportunity for Captains through Colonels to work in either COMPO 2 or 3.
(1)
(0)
(0)
(0)
2
2
0
I think this is a great idea. We purposely built the Army to require use of the Reserves, but many AC officers still do not get how to use us. I still have a battle with them on understanding that we have our own color of money (RPA) and computer system (RLAS) and can't simply use theirs.
(2)
(0)
1
1
0
This is a tough situation for both parties, but I think it definately rounds out a future GO. Its often a challenge to truly understand and lead a population you have never experienced but the gates you need to make to ensure competitiveness make this unlikely for some. It's probably a good objective that is rewarded when dont, but not a mandatory requirement.
(1)
(0)
1
1
0
When AC Service-members get sent to school, I think that would be a great time for them to work in a Reserve unit. It could be an enlightening, or even humbling experience, for those who think Reservists are less-than. It would also help Reserve units by providing more personnel and diverse experiences.
(1)
(0)
0
0
0
I thought Officers moving up the ranks have had to do at least one of the 3 Rs for some time (Reserve, Recruiting, or ROTC)?
(0)
(0)
COL Thomas Ficarra
Honestly, I have not heard that on the commissioned side, but I have seen that in the NCO ranks. The big 5 of recruiting, drill sergeant, ROTC, recruiting/retention, and AC/RC --- I might be off on one but you get the gist. PAM 600-3, Commissioned Officer Professional Development and Career Management, talks both requirements (like education), as well as recommended jobs per AOC/FA. Broadening assignments is the term it uses and refers to things like functional areas, academia, inter-agency assignments, and joint duty. However nothing I could find about RC assignments. It has been my experience that this PAM is followed more by the AC then RC officers, but I personally try to use it as a weather gauge on where I should go next, slots dependent of course.
(0)
(0)
I don't see why this should be a REQUIREMENT. At first glance, it doesn't make sense to me as a mandatory thing.
(0)
(0)
CPT Aaron Kletzing
Sir, why should time in non-AD component be mandatory? Based on what GO performance data are we making this argument that this is a necessary REQUIREMENT?
(0)
(0)
BG (Join to see)
Why do we make joint-qualified a requirement for GO? Because they absolutely need to understand jointness prior to working at a level where everything is joint. It is exactly the same for RC knowledge. Name me a GO level position that does not involve the RC? The Army cannot function without the RC by design.
(4)
(0)
Read This Next
Continue with Facebook 
Continue with Google